Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Detention Officers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate hearing highlights calls to add detention officers to longevity statute; counties seek amendment on union contracts
Summary
Senate Judiciary heard testimony on SB236 to extend a 1% annual longevity pay to detention officers. Sheriffs' associations and jail supervisors said it would improve retention; county officials warned of local budget impacts and requested clarifying language to avoid duplicating union benefits. No committee vote was taken that day.
Sen. Barry Usher opened testimony on Senate Bill 236, saying the measure would extend the 1% annual longevity benefit to detention officers to help counties recruit and retain staff. "Detention officers play a critical role in maintaining the safety and security of our criminal justice system," Usher said during his presentation.
Proponents stressed that detention centers statewide face chronic staffing shortages. Nanette Gilbertson of the Montana Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association told the committee the bill simply adds the words "and detention officers" to the existing statutory provision (74‑25‑10) so jail staff can receive the same 1% annual longevity deputies receive. "This is one more step to acknowledge that detention officers have one of the most challenging jobs in the criminal justice system," Gilbertson said.
Local jail leaders gave concrete details. Scott Van Dyken, undersheriff in Cascade County, described rapid turnover and high jail populations: "Our average daily population is anywhere between 450 to 480 inmates, and I have 90 detention officer slots," he said, and added that his office had hired 136 detention officers and 122 no longer work there. Brian Gerdes, a Flathead County detention sergeant, said 14% of approved positions are vacant and 24% of staff have less than one year of experience.
Speakers framed the change as a modest, targeted retention tool. Van Dyken and other sheriffs said counties that already offer longevity saw staffing benefits and that the proposed state language would bring parity across jurisdictions.
County officials raised fiscal concerns and requested a technical fix. Gordon Oakers (Montana Association of Counties / Roosevelt County Commissioner) testified as a soft opponent, noting Roosevelt County's detention budget of about $2,000,000 and that wages represent roughly 55 percent of that. He asked for an amendment clarifying that the state 1% statutory benefit should not duplicate or conflict with existing local union contract provisions.
Committee members pressed sponsors on whether the bill would force annexation or mandate county action. Witnesses and the sponsor said many counties already provide longevity and that the bill, as drafted, would extend parity across counties; stakeholders said they were working on a friendly amendment to reconcile the state mandate with union contracts and local budget constraints.
The committee closed the hearing on SB236 without taking a committee vote that day and indicated stakeholders were continuing discussions on a possible amendment.
What happens next: SB236 was not voted out of committee at this hearing. Committee members asked staff and stakeholders to continue drafting amendment language to address counties' concerns before executive action.
